The Mirror of Literature, Amusement, and Instruction. Volume 10, No. 274, September 22, 1827

Оглавление

Various. The Mirror of Literature, Amusement, and Instruction. Volume 10, No. 274, September 22, 1827

No. II

BRIDGET TROT AND TIMOTHY GREEN (For the Mirror.)

GREAT BELL OF GLASGOW (For the Mirror.)

FANCY (For the Mirror.)

FINE ARTS

THE PROGRESS OF PAINTING IN FRANCE (For the Mirror.)

MANNERS & CUSTOMS OF ALL NATIONS. No. XIII

SINGULAR JEWISH CUSTOM

CHARACTER OF THE KARPIANS, (ARABS.)

THE MODERN WELSH

ITALIAN WOMEN

MY COMMON-PLACE BOOK. No. XXII

A LINNET AT SEA

THE ADVANTAGES OF AFFLICTION

WEATHERCOCKS

THE VALUE OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS

SELECT BIOGRAPHY. No. LVII

KARL THEODORE KORNER

THE NOVELIST. No. CX

THE RESCUE

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS

THE CONFESSIONS OF AN ENGLISH NOVEL READER

CONTRAST OF CLIMATE

THE SELECTOR; AND LITERARY NOTICES OF NEW WORKS

ANECDOTES OF THE FACULTY

BURMESE BOATS

MISCELLANIES

SONNET

THE VEIL OF MARY QUEEN OF SCOTS

DREAMS

THE LECTURER

AN EXCERP FROM ABERNETHY'S LECTURES

THE GATHERER

A WELSH INVITATION

Отрывок из книги

THE TEMPLE CHURCH.

The Temple Church,1 London, was erected in the twelfth century; but among antiquarians considerable difference of opinion at various times prevailed as to who were the original builders of these round churches, which form the most striking and beautiful specimens of the architectural skill of our Anglo-Norman ancestors. In England there are four examples of round churches, almost in perfect preservation, namely, the church of St. Mary, Temple; St. Sepulchre, Northampton; St. Mary, Cambridge; and that of Little Maplestead, Essex. It was long thought that they were of Jewish origin; but through the ingenious and learned essays of Mr. Essex and of Mr. Britton, this erroneous notion has been entirely removed. Mr. Essex, in his Essay, observes, in support of his opinion, that "their Temple at Jerusalem was not of a circular form, neither was the Tabernacle of Moses; nor do we find the modern Jews affect that figure in building their synagogues. It has, however, been generally supposed that the round church at Cambridge, that at Northampton, and some others, were built for synagogues by the Jews while they were permitted to dwell in those places. But as no probable reason can be assigned for this supposition, and I think it is very certain that the Jews who were settled in Cambridge had their synagogue, and probably dwelled together in a part of the town now called the Jewry, so we may reasonably conclude the round churches we find in other parts of this kingdom were not built by the Jews for synagogues, whatever the places may be called in which they stand."—It has been generally allowed by these and other writers on archaeology, that the primitive church of this form was that of the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem, and that the Temple Church at London was built by the Knights' Templars, whose occupation was the protection of Christian pilgrims against the Saracens. It has been further urged by a correspondent (Charles Clarke, Esq. F.S.A.) in the first volume of Britton's "Architectural Antiquities," that two of the before-mentioned round churches, namely, Northampton and Cambridge, were in fact built by "affluent crusaders, in imitation of that of the Holy Sepulchre;" and in support of his opinion he cites several historical notices.

.....

In the reign of Louis XIV., Nicholas Poussin distinguished himself as a painter, by displaying exquisite knowledge and great skill in composition. He generally painted ancient ruins, landscapes, and historical figures. He was likewise well acquainted with the manners and customs of the ancients; and, though he educated no pupils, and never had any imitators, his pictures are universally admired in every European country. Charles le Brun5 established the French school,—an undertaking which Voüet had previously attempted. Le Brun drew well, had a ready conception, and a fertile imagination. His compositions are vast, but, in various instances, they may justly be termed outre. He possessed the animation, but not the inspiration of Raphael; and his design is not so pure as that of Domenichino, nor so lively as that of Annibale Caracci. Eustache le Seur, Le Brun's rival, possessed remarkable dignity, and wonderful correctness of style. Indeed, by some he has been called the Raphael of France. Had he lived longer, (for he died at the age of thirty-eight,) the French school, under his direction, would most probably have adopted a manner which might have been imitated, and which might have established the arts on an eminence to vie with even imperial Rome. But, by the concurrence of extraordinary circumstances, Le Brun was the fashionable painter of the time, and it therefore became necessary to imitate his manner, rather than the more simple and more refined one of his rival. As Le Brun's imitators wanted his genius, his faults not only became current, but more glaring and deformed.

After Le Brun's death, which took place in 1690, the French artists degenerated greatly, their productions being decorated in a gaudy and theatrical way, without due regard to taste or decorum. Their school, some years ago, altered its principles, under the auspices of the spirited Count de Caylus, who possessed considerable merit as an artist. The count, by his high rank and fortune, had the means of encouraging the imitators of the ancients, and of procuring the best models in Italy for study. He, in conjunction with Monsieur Vien, first formed the design of restoring a pure taste in France; and if his countrymen had followed the path thus marked out for them, they would now have been equal to the greatest of the Greek painters. But it appears that they are incapable of rising to any very extraordinary height in the arts, for, with the exception of Le Seur, and one or two others, they have ever wanted that elevation of mind which so eminently distinguished the Romans. Though De Caylus greatly purified painting in his time, yet his precepts and examples had little or no weight after his death, for the art again retrograded into its original state—a state from which the French professors, as before observed, seem incapable of rising.

.....